http://www.newmediajournal.us/ Just as the American people begin eying the torches and pitchforks, readying their maps of Washington, DC, the establishment politicos have set themselves to brazenly cover their butts yet again. This time, they are proposing a way to absolve themselves from tough votes on raising the debt ceiling. In the aftermath of our […]
http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/detail/the-press-endures-obamas-unrequited-love?f=puball Some years ago Bernard Goldberg wrote a book, “A Slobbering Love Affair With Obama”, about the way the press treated his 2008-9 campaign and election as President. The mainstream press continues to protect Obama, often rather blatantly. The curious thing about this is that it is not reciprocated. More and more, the press acts […]
http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/ Now that the dust has cleared and government services are open and available, let me engage in Monday morning quarterbacking. Right after his 2012 election victory President Obama did something he rarely does: he tuned in to Fox News. Nothing, he noted at the time, is more satisfying than schadenfreude or what might be […]
Fresh from presenting a “liberty medal” to Hillary Clinton on the anniversary of the Benghazi massacre, GOP establishment pillar Jeb Bush dropped in on ABC News over the weekend to bash Ted Cruz and the conservative campaign to stop Obamacare. (Memo to self: Maybe if conservatives called it the campaign to “abort” Obamacare, Beltway Republicans would be less confrontational.)
As if the last 40 years of American history, including the presidential administrations of his father and brother, had never happened, Bush urged that Republicans must:
[W]ith civility, have a dialogue about the bigger, more pressing issues, and try to find common ground. Rather than use each instance of a possible crisis to win a political point. We need to start solving problems….
Does it get any more vapid? Were there two more civil gentlemen on the planet than Presidents Bush 41 and 43? They were none the less savaged by the Left and its media. In opposing socialized medicine (as in other things) Ronald Reagan, too, was a model of civility, as is Sen. Cruz; yet for both rabid attacks were, and have been, the order of the day – coming from both the Left and the Republican establishment.
The press fawns over Democrats who demagogue conservatives as “terrorists” and “hostage-takers,” and over Beltway Republicans who deride conservatives as “wacko-birds” and “tea party hobbits.” Obviously, political strife in modern America has nothing to do with a lack of civility. It owes, instead, to the lack of common ground – not the inability to explore common ground but the non-existence of common ground.
We are not arguing here about the speed-limit on interstate highways or whether the ashy storm-petrel bird rates Endangered Species Act protection. With Obamacare, statists are trying, as President Obama has put it, to “fundamentally transform the United States of America.” Conservatives, by contrast, want to conserve the United States as constitutionally founded, which means preserving the individual and economic liberties that statists are effacing. There is no meaningful common ground between these polar opposites.
The statist side is enthusiastically championed by Democrats, and the conservative side by Republicans, albeit more reluctantly. Like the Democratic party, the GOP is run by Washington-oriented politicians and, thus, is more enamored of Washington-centered fiats than is the conservative base whose support Republicans need in order to be politically viable. In the vogue of establishment Republicans, Jeb Bush ostensibly directs his “Can’t we all just get along?” preachments at the Republican-Democrat divide. Clearly, though, as an all-but-formally-announced contender for the GOP’s 2016 presidential nod, he is more vexed by the widening disconnect between Republicans and conservatives.
http://frontpagemag.com/2013/bruce-bawer/documentary-shines-a-light-on-honor-killing/ In the low-quality police video that shows her giving a statement about her husband’s brutal, chronic physical abusiveness, she looks more beautiful than any movie star. Born in 1985, Banaz Mahmod was a Kurdish Muslim whose parents, having been granted asylum by the U.K., took her from Saddam’s Iraq to a pleasant-looking neighborhood in […]
“Chris Matthews’ government minstrel act is McRacism. Like other McRacist psychoracialists, he plumbs the depths of his own psychotic psyche to explain why government haters are racists to manufacture a cheap and offensive government substitute for racism that protects the abuses of career politicians and bureaucrats by teaching them to wear blackface and shout about racism.”
Chris Matthews, MSNBC’s own Wise Latina, began his latest attack by denouncing Ted Cruz’s racism against “Browns.”
Cruz had told a San Antonio audience that it was good to leave D.C. and come back to America.
“This isn’t a casual reference,” Matthews declared. Like Freudian psychoanalysts, MSNBC psychoracialists know that there are no such things as casual references. A misplaced comma can reveal unspeakable hidden depths of racism and does every time Rachel Maddow or Chris Hayes run short of material.
The Freudian psychoanalyst assumed that if you had a dream about a duck or the Orient Express, you were harboring a secret desire for your grandfather. The MSNBC psychoracialist knows that if you don’t like Obama, you’re a racist. All that’s left is finding the comma that proves it.
“This ‘We’re Americans, we white people out here in Texas, as opposed to people who live in the big cities: the ethnics, the blacks, the browns,” Matthews sputtered. “‘Those people in Washington, those liberals, they’re not Americans.’”
Chris Matthews had clearly never been to San Antonio which is twice the size of Washington, D.C. and one of the largest cities in America. It’s also fairly diverse. And Ted Cruz is more ethnic and ‘browner’ than Chris Matthews. Though in all fairness so is a stick of chalk.
This week’s Glazov Gang was joined by Karen Kenny, Founder of the San Fernando Valley Patriots, John Duffy, a Film Producer from the Bronx, and Kai Chen, the author of One In A Billion: Journey Toward Freedom.
(See Karen Kenny’s testimony before the Ways and Means Committee in Washington, DC on June 4, 2013 regarding the IRS scandal here).
The Gang discussed Obama Nurturing a Maoist-Style Culture? The discussion occurred in Part II and focused on how Americans are allowing Obama’s assault on America’s founding principles. The dialogue also shed light on Obama’s Rejection of the American Dream, ObamaCare’s Doom of Destruction, and much, much more.
“Nor, finally, is the tea party an independent outside force putting pressure on Republicans, according to the survey. Fully 76% of its supporters either identify with or lean toward the Republican Party. Rather, they are a dissident reform movement within the party, determined to move it back toward true conservatism after what they see as the apostasies of the Bush years and the outrages of the Obama administration.”
More than a decade ago, before the post-9/11 national fervor set in, Walter Russell Mead published an insightful essay on the persistent “Jacksonian tradition” in American society. Jacksonians, he argued, embrace a distinctive code, whose key tenets include self-reliance, individualism, loyalty and courage.
Jacksonians care as passionately about the Second Amendment as Jeffersonians do about the First. They are suspicious of federal power, skeptical about do-gooding at home and abroad; they oppose federal taxes but favor benefits such as Social Security and Medicare that they regard as earned. Jacksonians are anti-elitist; they believe that the political and moral instincts of ordinary people are usually wiser than those of the experts and that, as Mr. Mead wrote, “while problems are complicated, solutions are simple.”
That is why the Jacksonian hero defies the experts and entrenched elites and “dares to say what the people feel” without caring in the least what the liberal media will say about him. (Think Ted Cruz. )
The tea party is Jacksonian America, aroused, angry and above all fearful, in full revolt against a new elite—backed by the new American demography—that threatens its interests and scorns its values.
http://www.inquisitr.com/1001554/europes-battle-over-immigration-grows-french-surrender-at-mitrovica/#WYLHRFVELi1gjucH.99 Europe’s Battle Over Immigration Rages: French Surrender At Mitrovica [Introduction by Wolff Brachner] The battle for Europe’s soul, much like that of America, is being waged over immigration. European nations are being flooded with immigrants by the millions, many of whom are poor, illiterate, unskilled and often unwilling to assimilate. They cluster in enclaves […]
The panic of the liberals is not unfounded. The young and healthy will not persevere through a balky ObamaCare website to buy overpriced insurance policies. Older and sicker shoppers have the biggest incentive to try 63 times (as one journalist did) to register. President Obama is right. For these customers, ObamaCare is a very good deal: hundreds or thousands of dollars a month in health care for as little as $0 a month in premiums after direct subsidies.
Voilà, the insurance death spiral.
Three lessons jump to mind. ObamaCare’s disastrous launch is not just a programmer’s bad hair day but deeply implicated in the central con of ObamaCare.
Secondly, ObamaCare did not need to be founded on misdirection and hidden taxes on the young. It actually would have been a better program and cheaper for the country if it hadn’t been.
Finally liberals hate to be told their hardball policy aim is to make more Americans dependent on government. But in a year or two thousands or millions of older, sicker ObamaCare customers may find their premiums soaring when the young and healthy didn’t show up to subsidize their care. Then what?
Bad hair day: One reason for the snafu-laden rollout is that the administration apparently delayed in setting key rules and specs so no discussion drafts would be floating around before the 2012 election. Why? Because the media would then inevitably dig into the question of who wins and loses under ObamaCare’s thicket of explicit and implicit subsidies.